In a context of growing socio-spatial polarization and of restructuring state–market relations in urban governance, a new phenomenon is emerging in Swedish cities, that is, partnerships for urban regeneration inspired by the Business Improvement District (BID) model. Through an empirical case study research on one of the most long-standing BID partnerships in Sweden – that is, BID Gamlestaden in Gothenburg – the article critically assesses whether the BID model as it has been applied in Sweden represents a socially and politically sustainable tool for urban regeneration. Namely, the study analyses the complex constellation of power entrenched in the BID, with a focus on the relations with urban governance actors ‘above’ (city planning department, public housing, real estate companies, media, politicians) and ‘below’ (residents and local businesses). Despite general claims around BIDs as successful tools for uplifting distressed neighbourhoods, BID Gamlestaden presents shortcomings regarding issues of urban social justice in terms of democratic participation and representation (democracy), disciplining and sanitizing strategies (diversity) and gentrification risks (equality). In fact, while BID partners notice improved attractiveness and sense of security and higher estate values, this improvement is based upon the removal of the most socio-economically vulnerable residents and the disciplining of residents’ and businesses’ behaviours and aesthetics. This study warns about the risk that BIDs as they are currently implemented in Sweden are used as a ‘neoliberal fix’ to move social problems elsewhere rather than solving them, which might lead to new landscapes of exclusion and gentrification.

This article reports on a critical review of how cultural heritage is addressed in two internationally well-known and used neighborhood assessment tools (NSAs): BREEAM Communities (BREEAM-C) and LEED Neighborhood Design (LEED-ND). The review was done through a discourse analysis in which critical heritage studies, together with a conceptual linking of heritage to sustainability, served as the point of departure. The review showed that while aspects related to heritage are present in both NSAs, heritage is re-presented as primarily being a matter of safeguarding material expressions of culture, such as buildings and other artifacts, while natural elements and immaterial-related practices are disregarded. Moreover, the NSAs institutionalize heritage as a field of formal knowledge and expert-dominated over the informal knowledge of communities.

Urban social change and large-scale demolitions in the name of urban renewal often give rise to social conflicts. In this study, we investigate how resistances to this change emerge, coalesce and revolve, and how they use heritage to generate cumulative impact. The analyses of urban change and resistance in Gårda, a working-class neighbourhood of Gothenburg, Sweden, showed social conflicts to be instigated by their stigmatisation. Since the 1970s, Gårda has been called ‘out of place’ and marked for demolition. These demolitions were given legitimacy by the ‘housing quality standards’ that emerged in the 1930s as a means to reduce social inequalities. Over time these standards became an ‘intangible heritage’ employed in neoliberal urban policies. In response, five ‘Re-Gårda’ resistance strategies emerged to contest Gårda’s future. Resistance groups uncovered new values for Gårda, curating the vision with the slogan ‘have a coffee in Gårda’, and structuring the narrative ‘upgrade Gårda’. This challenged the dominant discourse ‘demolish’ or ‘conserve’ Gårda, and resulted in a government decision to protect Gårda as a ‘heritage site’. Investigating heritage and resistance in Gårda helped us reveal the potential of resistance in challenging the limits of authorised urban and heritage discourses, and in realising socially equal and just cities.

Over the years a growing number of planning and urban theorists located in, or writing on, planning and urban theories in the global South have argued that theories emerged on the basis of assumptions within a northern context that do not ‘fit’ or are not applicable in global South contexts (Rao 2006; Ferguson 2006; Watson 2009; Roy 2009; Myers 2011; Parnell and Robinson 2012). Hence, they maintain, there is a need to rethink the northern bias in planning and urban theory and to develop new concepts, ideas, vocabularies and practices from southern perspectives. McFarlane (2008) uses the term ‘southern turn’ in urban studies, while arguing that productive comparisons across contexts constitute an epistemological transformation in urban theory. He uses the term ‘urban shadow’ to explain how southern cities are considered marginal and on the ‘edges’ of a predominantly Euro-American oriented urban theory canon (McFarlane 2004; 2008). Rao dwells on Amin & Thirft’s (2002) Cities: Reimagining the Urban to develop her ‘slum as theory’ wherein she critically reflects on the dominant discourses that inform and guide planning and urban theory. In 2009, Watson (2009), a scholar based in the South, introduced the idea of ‘seeing from the south’ to explain the need for context-rooted theory development. Yiftachel (2006) introduced a South-Eastern approach instead to break the binary of North-South and East-West. Roy (2009) calls for new geographies of ‘imagination and epistemologies’, as dominant theorizations are based on Euro-American experience, and are unable to capture the grounded reality of the global South.

This paper examines how culture might be integrated in planning by critically rethinking the role of planners and knowledge in the planning systems of postcolonial contexts. The empirical study of cultural conception and utilization in Botswana suggests a shift from planning for culture to cultural institutionalization, where culture, rather than as an object, becomes integral to development planning decisions. The traditional division between bottom–up and top–down approaches is challenged, so as to allow a wider range of actors and views to interact during the entire planning process.

Wars, colonialism and other forms of violent conflict often result in ethnic cleansing, forced dispersion, exile and the destruction of societies. In places of diaspora and homelands, people embody various experiences and memories but also maintain flows of connections, through which they claim mutual ambitions for the restoration of their national identity. What happens when diaspora communities ‘return’ and join homeland communities in reconstruction efforts? Drawing on heritage as metaphorical ‘contact zones’ with transnational affective milieus, this study explores the complex temporalities of signification, experiences and healing that involve both communities in two specific sites, Qaryon Square and Al-Kabir Mosque, located in the Historic City of Nablus, Palestine. Conflicts at these two sites often become intensified when heritage experts overlook the ‘emotional’ and ‘transnational’ relationships of power that revolve around the diverging narratives of both communities. This study proposes new methodological arts of the contact zone to enhance new ways in heritage management that can collective engage with the multiple and transnational layers of heritage places beyond their geographic boundaries and any relationship with defined static pasts. Such engagement can help explore the contentious nature of heritage and the resonances it may have for reconciliation in post-violent conflict times.